The High Court of Delhi dismissed the State's leave to appeal against a Sessions Court's order acquitting respondents of murder and arms offences. The High Court agreed that the prosecution failed to prove its case and no grounds for leave to appeal were made out.
The petition is dismissed; leave to appeal denied.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~1
versus THAN SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents Through None
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
O R D E R % 09.08.2018
Page 1 of 3
CRL.L.P. 394/2018
charged with having fired gun shots upon Raju (PW-4), Sandeep (PW-7), Sita Ram (PW-11), Ajay Kumar (PW-4) and Jagram (PW-6) and thereby having committed the offence punishable under Sections 307/34 IPC and further causing them simple injuries having committed the offence under Sections 323/34 IPC.
Page 2 of 3
CRL.L.P. 394/2018
between two parties has been presented as an attack by one party on the other. The prosecution having miserably failed to prove its case, the trial Court was justified in acquitting the Respondents for the offences with which they were charged. No grounds have been made out for grant of leave to appeal.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
VINOD GOEL, J.
AUGUST 09, 2018 mw
Page 3 of 3
CRL.L.P. 394/2018
2 issues framed by the court
Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 302/307/323/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act.
Whether the trial court justified acquittal by finding eyewitness accounts contradictory and prosecution failed to explain injuries on accused.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
STATE
THAN SINGH
DHEERAJ KUMAR SINGH
RAJ KUMAR SINGH
S MURALIDHAR
VINOD GOEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
